Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Financial considerations

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • perrymason
    Guest replied
    Interesting that the cost of a gin was the same as the cost of a bed for one night.....so not surprising that we see women having to be working for hours to satisfy both a need for shelter and food and a desire to be able to drink themselves into a state where street sleep can be managed.

    Best regards

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    I'll retire to Bedlam

    Hello Septic. Thanks.

    [Heavy sigh.] Well, if one must take the authors cum grano salis, then do you know of anyone who would like to buy a library of ripper books?

    Seriously, I usually disregard generalities like "starving masses" etc. but you'd think the factual claims were straight.

    As Ebenezer Scrooge said, "I'll retire to Bedlam."

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Septic Blue
    Guest replied


    --- Click the Above 'Thumbnail' to View the Applicable Portion of an 'A&E Biography' Documentary ---

    2:36 / 9:53

    Narrator: "In contrast, the 'East End'; where 900,000 impoverished people lived in cramped, filthy slums, ..."

    This being said as a slide show depicts a photograph ("The Crawlers"; c. 1877) of a woman cradling a baby, on the steps of the Parish Workhouse of St. Giles in the Fields & St. George Bloomsbury, Short's Gardens, Endell Street, Parish of St. Giles in the Fields – a decidedly 'West End' location.

    "900,000 impoverished people" ?????????

    From the first of Charles Booth's three surveys …

    "Labour and Life of the People: London", Williams & Norgate, 1889-1891

    East London (Less Hackney):

    - Total Population (1891 Census): 705,114
    - Total Population (Charles Booth 1889 Estimate): 708,675

    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'A' ('vicious' (i.e. vice-ridden), 'semi-criminal'): 1.33%
    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'B' ('very poor'): 11.85%
    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'C' ('poor' - irregular income): 9.00%
    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'D' ('poor' - regular but inadequate income): 15.83%

    - Estimated Percentage; Below the 'Line of Poverty': 38.00%

    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'E' ('above the line of poverty' - regular 'standard' income): 44.31%
    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'F' ('highly skilled labour'): 11.40%
    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'G' ('lower middle-class'): 4.54%
    - Estimated Percentage; Class 'H' ('upper middle-class'): 1.75%

    - Estimated Percentage; Above the 'Line of Poverty': 62.00%

    Booth's data would suggest that London's 'East End', in 1888, was inhabited by ~710,000 persons, of whom ~270,000 were "impoverished", and of whom ~94,000 "lived in cramped, filthy slums".

    Those numbers are indeed alarming; but each is a 'far-cry' from being "900,000".

    3:03 / 9:53

    Martin Fido: "The 'East End' … at the end of the 1880's … an area where at any time, almost any woman might have to prostitute herself - as the only way to feed her children."

    This being said as a slide show depicts a photograph ("Evicted"; from George R. Sims's "Living London") of an eviction scene, that I believe occurred in either Southwark or Bermondsey.

    "an area where at any time, almost any woman might have to prostitute herself" ?????????

    That is unadulterated bullshit!

    3:45 / 9:53

    Donald Rumbelow: "You could buy one of these women for three pennies, or two pennies, or a loaf of stale bread. The price of three pennies was fixed, because that was what the women would pay for a large glass of gin."

    I have taken Rumbelow's tour, on three separate occasions. Each time, the above statement was made verbatim.

    Donald Rumbelow has seized upon the proclamations of Jack London's tour-guide, regarding a very specific group of down-trodden 'dollymops'. In so doing, he has perpetuated a myth.

    I believe we can rest assured that prostitutes of London's 'East End', in 1888, came in all 'shapes-and-sizes' and offered a multitude of 'services', for which there was an accordant range of 'going rates'.

    As for the parameters of that 'range': We plainly and simply do not know what they were!

    The conventional wisdoms of 'Ripperology' are in dire need of an 'overhaul'!

    That should start with the realization that the likes of Martin Fido, Donald Rumbelow, et al are not infallible!
    Last edited by Guest; 12-18-2009, 08:28 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    drab

    Hello Septic. I believe there was a range. So, for example, an all nighter with Mary Kelly might fetch considerably more than most. I was thinking about the "drabs." (They were called drabs? Or is that more lore?)

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • The Grave Maurice
    replied
    I'm not sure what you guys are arguing about. I've been on the Rumbelow tour, and I don't recall his saying that the price was capped by anything. Surely the London quote that Rumbelow has adopted ("...or a loaf of stale bread") indicates that the unfortunate women would accept whatever price they could get.

    Leave a comment:


  • Septic Blue
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    … Donald seems a good chap to quote.
    I'm sure Donald Rumbelow is many things: A somewhat sensationalist* tour-guide, being one of them. But, a demographer of Victorian London, he is not!

    * He also claims that the Parish Church of St. Botolph without Aldgate was known, in 1888, as the "Prostitutes' Church". That too, is 'Ripperlore'!

    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Are you saying that 3-4d was not the usual fee?
    I am saying firstly and fore mostly that we do not know what these women charged for their 'services'.

    I am also saying that with a very wide range of 'services' on offer, there would invariably have been an accordant range of 'going rates'.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    red light specials

    Hello Septic. Well, Donald seems a good chap to quote.

    Are you saying that 3-4d was not the usual fee?

    Whence the certainty about the lower fees?

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Septic Blue
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Why do you call it lore?

    ... perhaps you referred to the price charged by the ladies?
    Indeed, I did! For it is just that: 'Ripperlore'!

    And this, I am certain, is its source:



    "Those women there", said our guide, "will sell themselves for thru'pence, or tu'pence, or a loaf of stale bread".

    "The People of the Abyss", by Jack London (Chapter 6)

    Donald Rumbelow asserts three-to-four nights per week (i.e. as often as he hosts a tour), that "you could buy an 'East End' prostitute, in 1888, for three pennies, two pennies, or a loaf of stale bread". He then goes on to proclaim that "the price was 'fixed' (i.e. capped) at three pennies, as that was the price of a tall glass of gin".

    In the absence of any other known references, 'Ripperology' has seized upon Jack London's very specific pronouncement, regarding a very specific group of down-trodden souls, and established a convention that all 'East End' prostitutes typically charged ~ 2d-to-4d, in 1888.

    I am quite certain that at the height of desperation, the likes of Annie Chapman would have settled for absolutely anything she could get, in return for a 'wank', in some vermin-infested, sludge-filled alley.

    But I am just as certain that on a good night, having already procured a meal and bed for the evening, the likes of Frances Coles, when propositioned by an especially drunk and lustful sailor, would have demanded - and commanded - a 'half-crown' (i.e. 'two-and-six': 2s/6d), in return for an 'all-nighter', in some reasonably 'comfortable' accommodation.
    Last edited by Guest; 12-17-2009, 01:29 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Anie

    Hello JTR. Right. Annie may not have lasted long anyway.

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    lore

    Hello Septic. Well, it looks as if we've bumped into one another again.

    Why do you call it lore? There's an excellent piece on alcoholic beverages in Ripperologist 107, I believe. (Note my low level of doxastic involvement. Hopefully you'll not need to do a graphic reproduction of all the magazines. It may be 108.) It is interesting reading. I think it listed 3d as the late 18th c going rate. Given low inflation, well . . .

    But perhaps you referred to the price charged by the ladies? Did I get that wrong too?

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • JTRSickert
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello Maggy. A glass or 2 could get one tipsy which may have been the aim.

    You recall that Polly stated she had her doss money (about 6d) 3 times on the day of her murder but drank it up in each case. That figures out to about 1s 6d. Possibly 5 or 6 tricks? So it looks like 5 or 6 glasses of gin.

    Have mercy on her liver!

    The best.
    LC
    Lynn, indeed, bless her liver

    However, (and this goes for illness Annie Chapman was inflicted with as well) I guess as it turns out, they didn't really need to worry about those things anymore.

    Leave a comment:


  • Septic Blue
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    The price of a trick was roughly the same as a large glass of gin--3 or 4d.
    'Ripperlore', for which there is no historical basis. None, whatsoever!

    Leave a comment:


  • KatBradshaw
    replied
    London Dry was pretty cheap to make. I wonder more about the quality and purity than the actual alcohol content. Its cheap to make pure Alcohol.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    gin

    Hello Sam. The next to last Ripperologist had an extensive article on gin.

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    I'm not sure what the strength of the gin would have been, though, nor how watered-down it was. Anyone know?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X